https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87749 Reference proceedings cannot be used to reappreciate evidence or disturb the Tribunal's factual conclusions merely because another view is possible. Challenges alleging perversity, misuse of accomplice testimony, denial of cross-examination, or the Tribunal's use of a preponderance-of-probability standard all required fresh examination of the record and were therefore not entertained. The Court also declined to revisit the penalty, as its sustainability depended on the same factual findings. The reference was rejected in full because every question raised sought a rehearing of evidence rather than a pure issue of law. en-us Thu, 02 Jan 1997 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 10 Sep 2011 11:00:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87749 Reference proceedings cannot be used to reappreciate evidence or disturb the Tribunal's factual conclusions merely because another view is possible. Challenges alleging perversity, misuse of accomplice testimony, denial of cross-examination, or the Tribunal's use of a preponderance-of-probability standard all required fresh examination of the record and were therefore not entertained. The Court also declined to revisit the penalty, as its sustainability depended on the same factual findings. The reference was rejected in full because every question raised sought a rehearing of evidence rather than a pure issue of law. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 02 Jan 1997 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87749